Posted
by
Zonk
on Wednesday September 19, 2007 @12:33PM
from the rumble-and-tumble dept.

IGN was playing a build of the upcoming title Burnout: Paradise when they noticed something new about the controller in their hands: it was shaking. The rumble-equipped PlayStation 3 controller is almost certainly a reality at this point, with Kaz Harai's keynote tomorrow expected to officially announce the product. "The controller we were using to play the demo looked exactly like a standard Sixaxis, except that it had a sticker on the bottom that said 'RUMBLE.' It also felt notably heavier than the standard Sixaxis."

I'm going to miss how light the sixaxis is right now. It was the first thing I noticed when I picked one up and I'm a fan. For certain games, I would even go so far as to say that I would prefer the lighter version over the rumble ability (except for those games where the rumble gives feedback that I can't get better elsewhere).

When I picked up the 6 axis for the first time I was surprised how light it was and for games such as adventure and RPG's I found the controller excellent to the point I don't miss the relatively heavy DualShock. I won't deny that for some games rumble can be atmospheric and for some people it is a must. Still if you play for long periods of time a heavy controller with rumble can lead to sore hands.

What is annoying is the fact that a company like Immersion (backed behind the scenes by Microsoft when they

I'm convinced that there is a direct correlation in people's minds about the quality of a product, and the heft of it. The light something is, it just feels cheaper. Even with a titanium watch, it feels cheaper than other metal band watches. This definitely extends into the electronics area. I think some of it is the fact that there are very few ways you can judge the quality of devices, so anything that is available, you latch onto.

I remember when the PS3 first came out, the PR guy tried to spin the lack of Rumble as a good thing because it was "last generation." However, it turned out the company that they licensed the technology from would license it any longer and they finally came to terms a few months ago. PR is a funny thing.
If anything, this will be good cause it will allow me to at least get rumble back in my ps2 games, a feature that I really missed. Now just to see how long before it hits the shelves and how much it wi

You do realise that if you play PS1 and PS2 games on your PS3 that you can use a Dualshock controller with a PS2 to USB adaptor and if the the game supports rumble the controller will vibrate accordingly. Of course you should have firmware 1.8 or greater.

As far as battery life goes I have a Logitech 2 wireless PS2 controller that supports rumble and I can get well over 50 hours out of 2 AA batteries so I would not be surprised if the new "sixaxis-shock controller" has a battery life of 24 or more hours wi

That's funny if.. like.. you don't know the whole history of the SIXAXIS/Rumble story. To everybody else, it's yet another example of how Sony's been tripping over its arrogance over the last two years. Instead of just saying "We don't want to pay the licensing for it, and we don't think our customers will mind..." they spouted several different stories from technical problems with the unit to claiming it's not a big deal anyway. So yes, you're right, th

MS is a villain in a lot of areas, but not in this case. Immersion sued both MS and Sony for using rumble technology in their consoles without licencing it.MS bought a share of Immersion as a settlement, while Sony decided to keep fighting and eventually lost. I think it was obvious to both companies at the start that Immersion had a good case - MS quickly decided to settle while Sony decided not to. The 10% share of Immersion that MS bought as a settlement has nothing to do with Sony refusing to settle.

it's yet another example of how Sony's been tripping over its arrogance over the last two years

That's a fine opinion. I guess I don't care about "arrogance", whether it be imagined or real, lasting two years or more or less. It's a game console. The arrogance is just a bonus. You can have the arrogance I got with mine, BTW, I'm not using it.

You may want to be in love with the company that makes your game console. I don't have that re

Exactly. That includes games and movies that are coming in the future. In an extreme case, if Sony suddenly folded up shop on the whole PS3 thing, I seriously seriously doubt you'd be anything but pissed off about it.

"I didn't buy it thinking it had feature X and then later find out it didn't. I checked before I bought it."

That's great. But you still didn't buy a system without some form of trust with them. In the case of a game console,

In an extreme case, if Sony suddenly folded up shop on the whole PS3 thing, I seriously seriously doubt you'd be anything but pissed off about it.

No- I would continue to play my old PS2 games, Blue Ray movies, and my ripped dvd collection sitting on its hard drive like I do now.

Amazingly enough, for some people what the Playstation 3 offers other than games designed for it (blue ray, upconverts DVDs and PS2 games so they don't look like crap on my TV, play ripped movies and music, etc.) make it worth the m

"We have no plans to do so in the standard controller that ships with PlayStation 3. I believe that the Sixaxis controller offers game designers and developers far more opportunity for future innovation than rumble ever did. Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature. I think motion sensitivity is. And we don't see the need to do that." - Phil Harrison, President, Sony Worldwide, 26 Feb 2007

Ok, I missed Rumble (at least in MotorStorm), but please can you fix a few other things while you're at it?

1) Sixaxis Tilt is Not nearly sensitive enough to be useful. Please figure out a Fix or Hire someone who worked on ExciteTruck to do it for you.

2) The R2 & L2 Buttonie-trigger thing. Either make them proper buttons (like L1, R1), or triggers (like the 360), don't care which but this inbetween solution you have now is bad.

3) Swap the left Analog and Dpad. MS, Nintendo and Sega all did so because it is more comfortable to play 3D games that way. Bolting the Dual analogs at the bottom made sense in the PS1 era, but not 2 gens later.

4) User replaceable Battery. Make it AAA, AA, or Proprietary; I don't care which so long as I can swap it with another in a few seconds without disassembly.

3) Swap the left Analog and Dpad. MS, Nintendo and Sega all did so because it is more comfortable to play 3D games that way. Bolting the Dual analogs at the bottom made sense in the PS1 era, but not 2 gens later.

How come no 3rd party(Mad Catz, etc) has done this yet? You would think they would sell d-pad/left analog swapped game pads for PS2 or PS3 by the truck load to Xbox converts.

As for the analog triggers, they should have made them concave-shaped so your fingers don't slip off in all the action. I gues

Yeah, just like there weren't any (to my knowledge browsing at best buy and fry's:P) 3rd party GC controllers that had normal shaped/sized face buttons. I mean it's usually not about being creative, it's about being a cheap knockoff with rapid fire or other basic features.

3) Swap the left Analog and Dpad. MS, Nintendo and Sega all did so because it is more comfortable to play 3D games that way. Bolting the Dual analogs at the bottom made sense in the PS1 era, but not 2 gens later.

Oh, yuck. No way in hell do I want that. Analog sticks are fine where they are. Beautiful symmetry.

Those L2/R2 triggers are a mess, though, as you say. I shudder to think what it'd be like trying to play "Amplitude" on a controller like that...

You're declaring symmetry is more important than comfort and usability? You have some strange priorities.

I don't think comfort or usability are a problem with the Dual Shock, or chances are I wouldn't like the controller, dur-hey. My favorite PS2 games, the Armored Core series, use the analog sticks as the primary controls (for the last 4-5 years, anyway...) so it's not as though I'm not using these controls.

Sorry, but I gotta agree with the "swap location" group...I find that I have to actually stretch my thumb slightly to use a Playstation controller as opposed to simply resting my hand as it falls on the xbox/360/gamecube controller...I also find that my hand gets fatigued quicker on a Playstation controller than it does on either of the others.Anytime I have to adjust how my hands naturally rest on a controller into a position where I have to use muscle control to KEEP them in that position...yeah, that's w

Actually, yes, my right thumb in certain genres (FPS comes to mind) does in fact get tired faster than my left with with an xbox/360/gamcube controller. And with a playstation controller, with certain genres, they do both get fatigued just as quickly.

so.... your thumb gets fatigued because the left stick is on the bottom? Well, how about the right stick? You do know that your left hand is the mirror image of your right... it should be equal if indeed it happens. I think you're full of shit. Either that, or you have tiny hands... Either way, the right one should still give you trouble just as must as the left one does.

Exactly! It is the same. Yet why after a marathon session of GTA:SA does my left hand hurt and not my right? Because like in most games

5. Don't listen to this guy. Leave the D-Pad right where it is. It's 1000x better that way. If you're going to move them, put them in the same place on both sides of the controller. If you're going to move them up, you'll have to make the controller wider, otherwise your thumbs won't be properly aligned with the analog sticks.

Don't listen to the guy who thinks unnecessary hand stress is 1000x better. No, really. Putting the most used control down and to the right means you have to bend your thumb outward away from it's natural configuration. The reason you don't put them in the same place on both sides is because on the right side you want the buttons to be where it is most natural to push them -- imagine if they put the 4 primary buttons where the right analog stick is now. Hard to hit them, right? Right, because it's an unnatural position. The goal is to have the most neutral hand position for the most common items. MS and N understand this.

Back in the PS1, when the DPad was the most common item, Sony put the analog stick where it is for that reason. Keeping it out of the way of the DPad, so the DPad would be just as familiar and comfortable as it used to be. There was no excuse for keeping it in the same place on the PS2, and for the PS3 still having the mostly useless DPad where the thumb most naturally rests is idiotic. They keep it that way solely because of the brand recognition. But some people have convinced themselves that these historical reasons that de-emphasized the analog stick are actually ergonomic reasons that favor the analog stick. That the current location is the ideal spot for the analog stick, even though it was originally put in that spot exactly because it isn't the ideal spot for primary input.

If you really think down and to the right is the best, most optimal and comfortable position for the primary input method, why did zero controllers have that setup with the Dpad? The original PS1 controller didn't put the D-pad or buttons in that area, they put it in the upward position so that it's easiest to reach, just like everyone else.

Don't listen to the guy who thinks unnecessary hand stress is 1000x better. No, really. Putting the most used control down and to the right means you have to bend your thumb outward away from it's natural configuration.

Whether you have to bend your thumb down to get to where the lower control is has to do with the width of the controller, where you grip the controller, and how far apart your elbows are when you hold the controller.

If you're bending your thumbs to reach the analog stick, you're holding the

Wrong, how it's designed to be held, same difference. They made the controller wrong. Unless your forearms are at 180 degrees, you're bending your thumb to reach the sticks. If they made the controller correctly, there would be no issue of having to hold it "right" where "right" means "unlike the handgrips are designed for you to hold it".

their fans convince themselves that it's the opposite and everyone else is the crappy designer, so they don't ask for better.

That's one of the most idiotic things I've ever seen on slashdot. Do you seriously believe that no one actually likes the controllers? Not everyone agrees with you. Deal with it, rather than throwing fanboy-like accusations.

Don't be ridiculous. Of course people actually like it. I think a lot of them would also like a controller with the analog control swapped even more if they gave it a chance. And I think there are those who wouldn't prefer the analog-up configuration, even if that was the controller Sony had originally came out with. Yet that wasn't the controller came out with, they came out with Dual Shock, and that controller is the one many people c

Deny that, and yeah, I'm going to refer to Sony fans convincing themselves that whatever Sony does is inherently the best.

Yes, but what you said was that anyone who doesn't think Sony's design is inferior is being a fanboy (you didn't say fanboy, but you gave the standard definition of one). You didn't allow for the fact that people might actually prefer the design! I find the Dual Shocks extremely comfortable, and I prefer them to the 360 controllers (I won't touch the abomination that was the original Xbox controller) due to button placements, which work better for me. The sticks aren't better or worse, both designs work eq

Yes, but what you said was that anyone who doesn't think Sony's design is inferior is being a fanboy (you didn't say fanboy, but you gave the standard definition of one). You didn't allow for the fact that people might actually prefer the design!

No, that's not what I said. I said fanboys convince themselves that Sony's design is superior, and it was directed at the person I was replying to. That's not the same as saying everyone who likes the Dual Shock is a fanboy.

Oh hey, I just remembered there's a counterexample to the rule -- the Wii Classic controller also has the dpad up and the left analog down. Oddly enough, it too has historical baggage in the sense that it is designed to play games which range from the NES to the GC. Like the Dual Shock, it's designed with the d-pad as primary for that reason, though in my brief experience with it I think it's even less comfortable than Dual Shock. Good thing I have my GC controller -- though I'll probably use the wiimote f

Yeah, I know, and the idea that this somehow by chance happens to be the most ergonomic design just seems silly to me. The implication is that the d-pad on the original psx controller is poorly placed and unergonomic...

FWIW, I hold the PS2 and PS3 controllers with the grip prongs resting on the bottom three fingers of each hand past the first joint (sometimes just two if I need to use both shoulder buttons on both sides a lot). In this configuration, the current location of the sticks is obviously the most natural location for them. In order to reproduce the "hand stress" you talk about, I have to shift my grip way down so that the prongs are resting in my palms, which is an absurd way to hold the controller.

Sony could reduce the size of the analog stick that moved to dpad location. I believe this would be a better controller, but aside from that I love how sony hasn't screwed much with their controller since they ripped off the SNES controller. Now, they have a real brand image that looks nice and cool.But if it were really this much of an enhancement, why don't I see a logitech PS3 controller in this configuration? I suspect that in practice you might be right about the analog sticks needing to be symmetri

But if it were really this much of an enhancement, why don't I see a logitech PS3 controller in this configuration?

There actually are 3rd-party PS2 controllers sold in Japan with the left analog and dpad swapped. I don't know the brand, or if they're also available in other countries.

Sony has always been bad at controller design, and the analogue stick placement is IMHO the dualshock's worst flaw. Sony, unfortunately, seems to not particularly care about the ergonomics of the controller -- and what little

Parent is not a troll -- the motion sensitivity is *very* sensitive. Play super rub'a'dub or any other game that uses the tilt functions heavily and you'll see how sensitive it can be. Watch the replays of the top players in super rub'a'dub to realize how precise it *must* be to let them do what they do.

As for the analog layout, my thumbs reach the sticks fine, with no funny bending, and I have great control, I just wish the L2 and R2 were concave as the other comment mentionned.

5. Don't listen to this guy. Leave the D-Pad right where it is. It's 1000x better that way. If you're going to move them, put them in the same place on both sides of the controller. If you're going to move them up, you'll have to make the controller wider, otherwise your thumbs won't be properly aligned with the analog sticks.

Anybody want to take a guess what who in this conversation has never worked with, or for, a human factors group?

My only battery life annoyance with the PS3 controller is that it doesn't charge if the system is shut off. And no, its not off, its on "standby" of course, and could easily send power to the USB ports for charging purposes. It doesn't matter much as I usually leave it on F@H overnight with the controller plugged in.And technology considered, its quite possible they've improved battery lifetime over the year as well, either with a better battery pack or lower power internal electronics, so we may not noti

Yeah, there's gameplay footage and a "teaser" and screenshots available -- I think you can check ign.com for them. It's officially on 360; in fact it's being published by MS rather than TECMO as far as I know so there's no way it will be cross-platform, heh.

Nothing about multiplayer, though. Oh well, if they had that I'd be the next guy dead after playing 96 hours straight. Well, maybe if I got myself on an IV feeder and a catheter... but then I'd wear my fingers down to nubs. Maybe I could rivet steel tips on, it'd hurt a lot at first, but I think the benefits outweigh...

Yeah this game is 50% of the reason I got a 360 a year ago. (The rest of its game library including upcoming games is the other 50%.) It was my favorite game of the previous generation, besides Morrowind which I played on PC. NG2 is likely to be my fav game of this generation not counting Oblivion, heh. Gotta get both my action and adventure fix, heh.

Primarily, yes. Just like most Wii owners I know (who got it as soon as they could) primarily bought it for Smash Brawl. But for now I've been enjoying Oblivion, DOA4, Gears of War, Forza 2, and a couple of other games very much. I don't have that much free time for games so between those and my PS2, PC, Cube, and DS, I'm basically set for a while. Halo 3, Mass Effect, and a couple other titles will hold me over until NG2. Plus I'll get a Wii for Smash and Galaxy in the meantime.

Halo 3 looks fun and all, but there are far more exciting things coming out for the system than Halo 3...

Not necessarily. I'm looking forward to some of those games quite a bit (Mmmm, Mass Effect), but none of them compare to my excitement for Halo 3 (finale to the best FPS series ever!). You don't have to be a "Madden gamer" (I'm assuming you're referencing the sterotypical Halo player) to really, really want the game.

Don't get me wrong, I really want it too...but when you get right down to it, it's still Halo. It can't possibly stray too far from the first two games, otherwise it would piss off too many people.I'm sure it will be a great game, it's just that it doesn't really seem to be introducing anything spectacularly new...I know, I know, the whole "reserve judgment until after you have played it" deal...still, I think it's reasonable to expect it to be More of the Same(TM), just (much) prettier.

So, by your own logic, you shouldn't look forward to Ninja Gaiden 2, because it'll still be Ninja Gaiden, when you get down to it.;)

I'm under no illusions that Halo 3 will rock the boat, my point was just that you don't have to be a dumb, beer-guzzling frat boy (or whatever "dumb Halo player" stereotype you prefer) to think that it's the best game coming out for the 360 that we know of.

hey hey, no fair turning my own illogical logic against me! 8DAnyway, I know you don't have to be the beer-guzzling fratboy, it's just that I find people that are fanatical about it tend to be a certain kind of gamer (i.e. the type that don't delve into unknowns like Ico, Psychonauts, etc.) I know that is a very broad generlization and I know that I am wrong, but just in my own experience that is what it seems to be.

I suppose another thing about it is I've been playing FPS games since Catacomb 3D...it take

Sorry...It's just my initial reaction whenever I read or hear someone talking about how great the system is and then Halo 3 is the game that gets mentioned...twas a similar situation with the first Xbox 8D

No it won't, but if you put it together right, it'll perform better then the consoles for the rest of *their* lives, and it has an upgrade path. If you place such a premium on visuals a console isn't a viable option *anyway* since you can always get a PC to outperform it, even at release, if cost isn't a concern.

Will this save the PS3? Consider that Heavenly Sword was supposed to be a console seller...it turned out to be a 5 hours affair with 2 hours of cutscenes and gameplay that made me think of God of War, Dynasty Warriors and Ninety-Nine Nights....'cept with a much prettier lead character.

First, I work as a video game reporter, among other things. I've been to these shows, though sadly I didn't make it to TGS this year. (Last year was fun though.)

Us people in the know have been very harsh on Sony about Heavenly Sword's length, but you know what, all the common video game consumer friends I have with a PS3 have called me up to ask if I absolutely loved the game as much as them... and when I tried to explain that it was great but short, most of them told me in a matter of fact way that the game was like an epic movie that you got to play, and that being short made sense to them because it kicked ass in the short time it played and it didn't have tons of filler, which they didn't want.

Us 'elite' gamers have been giving it a bad rap, and I know that this is simply anecdotal, but it appears to me that the ho-hum consumer actually appreciates the shortness vs. the content.

I think it's more that it's a game that is at least good on the PS3. When you've only had crappy games for the past year, a game that is great but short seems that much greater. A truly great game has staying power, and remains fun long after it's beaten. Ask your friends again in January how often they've played Heavenly Sword.

Or, even better, in January ask them if they feel they got their $60 worth out of the title. You can also point out that if you spend $60 on DVDs you'd get more entertainment

Us people in the know have been very harsh on Sony about Heavenly Sword's length, but you know what, all the common video game consumer friends I have with a PS3 have called me up to ask if I absolutely loved the game as much as them... and when I tried to explain that it was great but short, most of them told me in a matter of fact way that the game was like an epic movie that you got to play, and that being short made sense to them because it kicked ass in the short time it played and it didn't have tons

But my favorite part of first-person shooters are the parts where you fight your way back through areas you were already in to extend the playtime. I especially appreciate it when they strip you of all your weapons first.

Yeah I would have preferred halo trimmed by about 50% since thats how much filler you had to go through to play the unique or interesting parts.

+1. I think 50% is proably being generous.i only ever got a few hours into halo because i found it dull and unnecessarily repetitive. from what i played it seemed like for every hour of gameplay, 40 minutes was spent playing filler. some gamers seem to love filler, I call them jocks. I suspect their thinking is something along the lines:"oh, wow! more of the same!

It isn't just the shortness of the game. Every single fight seems the same. There is the occasional 'aim and shoot' with either a crossbow, or cannon or whatever, but the majority is 'swarm of guys come at you, kill them'. At least the GoW series had different styles of enemies. In HS, they were all the same (at least until I got to the point where I said screw it and went back to finish GOW2).

Us people in the know have been very harsh on Sony about Heavenly Sword's length, but you know what, all the common video game consumer friends I have with a PS3 have called me up to ask if I absolutely loved the game as much as them... and when I tried to explain that it was great but short, most of them told me in a matter of fact way that the game was like an epic movie that you got to play, and that being short made sense to them because it kicked ass in the short time it played and it didn't have tons

Sony should have cut the game down to $30~$40 from the get-go to promote sales. Instead, Sony marketed the game as a full-fledged game and gamers were disappointed when it turned into a movie with button mashing filler.

Its not about shortness/length vs. content (at least in this case), but a matter of interactivity vs. non-interactivity. Games like Halo or Bioshock (not counting the intros or endings, both games have extremely little cutscenes or FMVs) have very high action vs. inaction ratios in this case

I loved playing God of WAr, but that game dragged on for me. Quite a few modern games (BioShock) are great, but they start to drag after 10 hours of play. Action, FPS... games should be short, and have tons of replayability to them. Habitually I only play through them once and shelve em after. Loooong story lines should be kept to the RPG settings of epic stories like Final Fantasy, Xenosaga... Then again with the 300hours of Baldur's gate, I only sufered it once, even though it was awesome.If companies wa

That's the funny thing about the marketing aspect... I saw commercials on TV all the time for both the system and games for the system (remember the 9/9/99 deal?) It is completely beyond me why more people didn't buy one.The only thing I can think of is that they were taking the Sega Saturn as an indication of what the console was going to be like. For what it's worth, the Saturn's library as a whole was rather horrible, however the games that were good were REALLY good.

The crappy controllers didn't help either. This was the first system I've used where the third-party MadCatz controllers were DRAMATICALLY superior to the standard controllers. And piracy was also a factor.

The inward curving grips were brutal for my hands. The Madcatz controllers also had a six-button face (duplicating the shoulder buttons on the face) making it perfect for six-button fighting games, like Capcom vs. SNK. DC was basically THE platform for fighting games, with Soul Calibur being one of the launch titles and one of the best fighting games ever.

> gameplay that made me think of God of War, Dynasty Warriors and Ninety-Nine Nights

One of these things is not like the other... If a game has gameplay like God of War, I am sold. Hell, GOW3 together with Ratchet and Clank might move a PS3 for me if I ever stop playing the 360. But from the screens I've seen, it indeed does look more like DW or N3, games where it's fun to mow down enemies for the first minute, then it literally gets as boring as actual mowing.

It felt very much like God of War to me, and I really enjoyed the combat more to be honest. In Heavenly Sword you have three "stances" that change your attacks radically. Getting crowded in use the ranged attack to back everyone up then focus on one guy with speed or the big attack stances. You switch back and forth on the fly (controlled with the shoulder buttons) time your counter attacks right and it's an instant kill for you mixed with a sweet CS sometimes. Getting banged up and flung in the air? Sh

That would explain it. Dynasty Warriors (and its clones, like N3) is a distilled archetype of "repetitive". In these games, you face hundreds, thousands of enemies spawned by the Great Clone Brush In The Sky, and plow through them with spectacular attacks, scattering them by the dozens with each hit. It's really cool, for about a minute of gameplay. Then you realize that gameplay consists inevitably of mashing the same button, over and over and over and over and over a

HS is pretty amazing, imo. It's not as good as it could be (enemies do some REALLY cheap things sometimes, and the plot is generic), but it's a ton of fun to play. The voice acting is also some of the best I've seen in a game, especially the main villian, brought to life so well by Andy Serkis. And in what is an extreme rarity among games, the game is as much fun to watch as it is to play.

Not to mention that since I had so much fun, I'm definitely going to replay it quite a bit. Well worth the $60, imho.

Honestly I'd much rather play a short, great game than a long, drawn out, decent game. When I was in high school I could play video games for 40 hours a week but all through college and now as a nine-to-fiver, I can barely manage three hours a week. That's part of the reason why I started my own video game review site, where I only review the first hour of a game ( http://www.thefirsthourblog.com/ [thefirsthourblog.com] ).

and gameplay that made me think of God of War

And that's bad how? God of War plays great. I've never played Heavenly Sword, heck I don't even own a P

preface: i own all 3 current gen consoles...
i love how the ps3 and wii guys take shots at each other and the xbox crowd. all of their arguments are hardware based because they have no games to argue about.
now...what do i want to play today on my 360....decisions, decisions...

I love slashdot. Where pointing out a fact that saying something is "almost a certainty" is not the same thing as "confirmed" gets labeled a troll. It's one of the reasons I hang out here, funny stuff like that. What did I step on a few fanboi's toes? That'd be funny as hell given I own and applaud my PS3, have zero interest in Xbox or 360. I'm no fan boy but the PS2 and PS3 are the consoles used in this house.Still, it is a fact that "almost a certainty" is not the same thing as confirmed. Confirmed would

No you don't need to rush out an buy the sixaxis shock controller unless you feel that you "positively have" to have rumble in the game your playing (assuming it supports rumble). Even if you go back to the PS1 and PS2 games that support rumble you normally had the option to turn the rumble feature off. With the PS3 games that support sixaxis functionality you wont have any option to turn this feature off, so sixaxis on the PS3 is essential while rumble will become optional which it always has been.